FortunaElite Club Book a seat
Menu

Lifting three at six

Level 3. Professional · 9 min read

The author of "50 Shades of Red" opens the chapter with a quotation from Black Widow about Thanos, who "wiped out fifty percent of all living beings". At six players the town really must remove half of the table, and it must do it correctly: otherwise the reds may lose. The lesson explains the condition, the hand scheme, the insurance and the order of drilling.

When this device is needed

The need arises when the version of the game is chosen correctly, in order to bring it to victory. There was a miss in the town, and the sheriff in the night of his death made a third red check. The line is determined. At six players three civilians are known by checks. The author explains in a footnote: the third red check gives a mathematical victory with a correct split of the table, while with two red checks and one black there is a probability of losing in the guessing round.

Why three candidates, not one or two

  • If you lift one, the mafia can win two on two: among the trio of unchecked players there is one red.
  • If you lift two, the mafia can and will break the vote into a civilian.
  • Lifting three closes this possibility: we split the table so that the black players purely physically cannot break into a red. For this one of those standing in the vote is forced to make a red move and vote for himself. If a player refuses, he is mafia or has zero understanding of the game.

The scheme

The author's example. At the table no. 1, no. 2, no. 3, no. 4, no. 5, no. 6; no. 1, no. 4, no. 5 are red (checked), no. 2, no. 3, no. 6 are unchecked. Nominated: no. 2, no. 3, no. 6.

  • For removing no. 2 vote no. 2 and no. 3.
  • For removing no. 3 vote no. 6 and no. 1.
  • For removing no. 6 vote the reds no. 4 and no. 5.

What to do on a break (insurance)

When the vote is broken, the civilians instantly finish off the one who broke by voting for him in unison.

  • If no. 2 did not vote for himself, add a hand.
  • If no. 3 did not vote for no. 2, remove no. 3.
  • If no. 6 did not add a hand for no. 3, he broke into himself.
  • If no. 6 threw a third vote onto the first candidate, remove no. 6 in the repeat vote.

Consequently the vote is absolutely safe if the civilians insure against a break. In that case the mafia can only surrender. The reds agree on the scheme among themselves and remember it; in a game it is enough for one civilian to know the split, and in his minute he explains it to the others.

The default rule ("ascending")

  1. For removing the player nominated under the first hands vote he himself and the player nominated under the second hands.
  2. For removing the player under the second hands vote the player nominated under the third hands and one civilian (ascending by number).
  3. The remaining civilians vote for the player nominated under the third hands (the two civilians with the highest serial numbers).

The author recommends fixing the "ascending" rule instead of creative splitting: it saves time and effort.

Why a break does not help the mafia

Every vote is distributed so that anyone who refuses to vote for himself or does not add a hand gives himself away. A break does not win the game, it only exposes the mafia, and the reds finish off the violator in the repeat vote. If you have to split the table for the reds, the author asks you to do it loudly and without exceptions: he reminds us that a player who sabotages an objectively favourable tie vote is either mafia or poorly understands the game.

The author's workshop

Bring the skill to automatism: 20 minutes of practice will make you a confident "sawer" for six people. The first eight examples on paper, the remaining eight in your head. Criterion: work out who votes where in less than 20 seconds. In a real game the remaining 40 seconds of the speech are needed to explain the split clearly to everyone at the table.

Condition: three reds are known, three players are nominated. Solve by the ascending rule.

  1. Reds no. 3, no. 9, no. 10. Nominated no. 1, no. 5, no. 7.
  2. Reds no. 1, no. 7, no. 9. Nominated no. 3, no. 6, no. 5.
  3. Reds no. 2, no. 9, no. 10. Nominated no. 4, no. 1, no. 7.
  4. Reds no. 3, no. 4, no. 6. Nominated no. 5, no. 8, no. 7.
  5. Reds no. 6, no. 8, no. 9. Nominated no. 1, no. 10, no. 5.
  6. Reds no. 3, no. 7, no. 9. Nominated no. 10, no. 8, no. 1.
  7. Reds no. 6, no. 8, no. 9. Nominated no. 5, no. 2, no. 4.
  8. Reds no. 1, no. 2, no. 6. Nominated no. 8, no. 3, no. 5.
  9. Reds no. 6, no. 8, no. 10. Nominated no. 3, no. 4, no. 5.
  10. Reds no. 1, no. 8, no. 9. Nominated no. 7, no. 4, no. 6.
  11. Reds no. 7, no. 8, no. 10. Nominated no. 1, no. 9, no. 2.
  12. Reds no. 1, no. 7, no. 9. Nominated no. 10, no. 2, no. 5.
  13. Reds no. 3, no. 4, no. 6. Nominated no. 9, no. 5, no. 10.
  14. Reds no. 5, no. 8, no. 10. Nominated no. 1, no. 2, no. 4.
  15. Reds no. 5, no. 6, no. 7. Nominated no. 8, no. 4, no. 3.
  16. Reds no. 1, no. 8, no. 10. Nominated no. 9, no. 2, no. 4.

Key to the first eight tasks

Written as "who votes: for whom". Checked against the rule and matches the answers in the appendix of the book.

  1. No. 1 and no. 5: for no. 1; no. 7 and no. 3: for no. 5; no. 9 and no. 10: for no. 7.
  2. No. 3 and no. 6: for no. 3; no. 5 and no. 1: for no. 6; no. 7 and no. 9: for no. 5.
  3. No. 4 and no. 1: for no. 4; no. 7 and no. 2: for no. 1; no. 9 and no. 10: for no. 7.
  4. No. 5 and no. 8: for no. 5; no. 7 and no. 3: for no. 8; no. 4 and no. 6: for no. 7.
  5. No. 1 and no. 10: for no. 1; no. 5 and no. 6: for no. 10; no. 8 and no. 9: for no. 5.
  6. No. 10 and no. 8: for no. 10; no. 1 and no. 3: for no. 8; no. 7 and no. 9: for no. 1.
  7. No. 5 and no. 2: for no. 5; no. 4 and no. 6: for no. 2; no. 8 and no. 9: for no. 4.
  8. No. 8 and no. 3: for no. 8; no. 5 and no. 1: for no. 3; no. 2 and no. 6: for no. 5.

Solve the other eight tasks by the same template and check them with each other.

For the black

At six the black must look for an error in the distribution. If the reds did not agree on the scheme aloud, you can fail to put a hand and explain it as "a disagreement". But the reds finish off the violator: so a break makes sense only where the reds do not know the rule. If the scheme is announced and shown on the fingers, what remains is to play for the maximum plausibility of the line.

Example (compiled for the Academy)

Six players: reds no. 1, no. 4, no. 5, unchecked no. 2, no. 3, no. 6. Red no. 4 says in his minute: "I nominate no. 2, no. 3, no. 6. For no. 2 vote no. 2 and no. 3, for no. 3 vote no. 6 and no. 1, for no. 6 we vote, me and no. 5. If someone does not add a hand, we finish him off." No. 3 does not put a hand for no. 2. Everyone finishes off no. 3. The game ends with a victory for the reds.

Self-check questions

  1. Why do lifting one and lifting two not work?
  2. Who in the scheme is obliged to vote for himself?
  3. What to do if one of the candidates did not add a hand?
  4. Why is the scheme safe only with insurance?

Practice

Solve the sixteen tasks, timing yourself. Then play three training games of sixes: one plays the red and explains the scheme, the others break in turn.

Typical mistakes

  • Forgetting that one of the candidates votes for himself.
  • Mixing up the order.
  • Not insuring against a break.
  • Not explaining the scheme to the table.
  • Creative splitting instead of the ascending rule.

Source of the idea. The chapter "Lifting three at six players" from Dmitry Novik's book "50 Shades of Red" (2021). The task conditions and the rule belong to the author, the key was written by us. The example, questions and practice were compiled for the Academy.

Up one level
Back to top
Upcoming games